HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 34909 of 2025 Court No. - 75 HON'BLE SANJAY KUMAR PACHORI, J. Heard Sri Vijay Anand Rai, learned counsel for applicant and Sri Manvendra Pratap Singh, learned A.G.A for the State and perused the record. The instant application under Section 528 B.N.S.S. has been filed for quashing the charge sheet dated 28.4.2025, cognizance/summoning order dated 5.8.2025 as well as entire consequential proceedings of Case Crime No. 62 of 2025 (State Vs. Anshuman Singh), under Sections 115(2), 352 B.N.S., Police Station- Chetganj, District Varanasi, pending in the court of A.C.J.M.- 5, Varanasi. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant was not arrested during the course of investigation and the charge-sheet has been submitted against him. It is further submitted that the offence is punishable up to 7 years imprisonment. Upon considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the prayer made by learned counsel for the applicant is, hereby, refused. After some arguments, learned counsel for the applicant wants to withdraw the application with liberty to file a regular bail application before the court of competent jurisdiction. In case bail application is filed by the learned counsel for the applicant, the same shall be decided in the light of the observations made in the judgment rendered by the Supreme Court in Satender Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation & Another, (2022) 10 SCC 51, wherein the Supreme Court considering the category(A) as mentioned in the paragraph Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Krishna Nand Rai, Vijay Anand Rai Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Anshuman Singh .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Opposite Party(s) no. 2, bail applications of such accused against which charge-sheet has been submitted on appearance may be decided without the accused being taken in physical custody or by granting interim bail till the bail application is decided. It has been observed that at the cost of repetition, we wish to state that, in category A, one would expect a better exercise of discretion on the part of the court in favour of the accused. The application stands disposed of with the aforesaid liberty. October 17, 2025 A.K.Srivastava NA528 No. 34909 of 2025 2 (Sanjay Kumar Pachori,J.) Digitally signed by :- ARUN KUMAR SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad